Thursday, September 9, 2010

Biz speak: why can't companies speak English?

Having written for many executives and companies, and having read the work of many more, I consider my main contribution to be clarity. This means throwing out cliches and cleaning up clutter in general.

Tyler Cowen at Marginal Revolution explains my never-ending source of revenue.
People disagree in corporations, often virulently, or they would disagree if enough real debates were allowed to reach the surface.  The use of broad generalities, in rhetoric, masks such potential disagreements and helps maintain corporate order and authority.  Since it is hard to oppose fluffy generalities in any very specific way, a common strategy is to stack everyone's opinion or points into an incoherent whole.  Disagreement is then less likely to become a focal point within the corporation and warring coalitions are less likely to form.  
Groupthink it is sometimes called.
Real "straight talk" very often is not compatible with authority, as it breeds conflict.  Do political leaders give us much real straight talk?  Do CEOs in their public addresses?

When direct financial incentives can work well, such as in sales (bonuses) or in some parts of finance, there is much more straight talk.  Disagreement and candor can flourish, because the $$ keep the workers on a common track.
William H. Whyte, the journalist, coined the term groupthink in 1952, in Fortune magazine:
Groupthink being a coinage—and, admittedly, a loaded one—a working definition is in order. We are not talking about mere instinctive conformity—it is, after all, a perennial failing of mankind. What we are talking about is a rationalized conformity—an open, articulate philosophy which holds that group values are not only expedient but right and good as well.
Everything happens for a reason.

No comments: